Filetype PDF | Posted on 20 Sep 2022 | 3 years ago
Authentication
digital resources
286x Filetype PDF File size 0.67 MB Source: jenni.uchicago.edu
The Economics and Psychology of
Personality Traits
Lex Borghans
Angela Lee Duckworth
James J. Heckman
Bas ter Weel
abstract
This paper explores the interface between personality psychology and
economics. We examine the predictive power of personality and the stability
of personality traits over the life cycle. We develop simple analytical
frameworks for interpreting the evidence in personality psychology and
suggest promising avenues for future research.
Lex Borghans is a professor of labor economics and social policy at Maastricht University and the
Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA). Angela L. Duckworth is an assistant
professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania. James J. Heckman is the Henry Schultz
Distinguished Service Professor in Economics, the College and the Harris School of Public Policy
Studies; Director of the Economics Research Center, University of Chicago; Director of the Center for
Social Program Evaluation, Harris Graduate School of Public Policy Studies; senior fellow of the
American Bar Foundation; Professor of Science and Society at University College Dublin; and Cowles
Foundation Distinguished Visiting Professor, Yale University. Bas ter Weel is department head at the
Department of International Economics with the CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy
Research and Senior researcher with UNU-MERIT, Maastricht University. Duckworth’s work is
supported by a grant from the John Templeton Foundation. Heckman’s work is supported by NIH R01-
HD043411, and grants from the American Bar Foundation, The Pew Charitable Trusts, the Partnership
for America’s Economic Success, and the J.B. Pritzker Consortium on Early Childhood Development.
Ter Weel’s work was supported by a research grant of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific
Research (grant 014-43-711). Chris Hsee gave us very useful advice at an early stage. We are grateful
to Arianna Zanolini for helpful comments and research assistance. We have received very helpful
comments on various versions of this draft from Gary Becker, Dan Benjamin, Dan Black, Ken Bollen,
Sam Bowles, Frances Campbell, Flavio Cunha, John Dagsvik, Michael Daly, Liam Delany,
Kevin Denny, Thomas Dohmen, Greg Duncan, Armin Falk, James Flynn, Linda Gottfredson, Lars
Hansen, Joop Hartog, Moshe Hoffman, Bob Hogan, Nathan Kuncel, John List, Lena Malofeeva,
Kenneth McKenzie, Kevin Murphy, Frank Norman, David Olds, Friedhelm Pfeiffer, Bernard Van Praag,
Elizabeth Pungello, Howard Rachlin, C. Cybele Raver, Bill Revelle, Brent Roberts, Carol Ryff, Larry
Schweinhart, Jesse Shapiro, Rebecca Shiner, Burt Singer, Richard Suzman, Harald Uhlig, Sergio Urzua,
Gert Wagner, Herb Walberg, and participants in the Applications Workshop at the University of
Chicago, and workshops at Iowa State University, Brown University, University College Dublin, and
Washington State University. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not
necessarily of the funders or individuals listed here. The data used in his article can be obtained
beginning May 2009 through April 2012 from Lex Borghans, Department of Economics, PO Box 616,
6200 MD, the Netherlands, lex.borghans@algec.unimaas.nl
½Submitted May 2006; accepted December 2006
ISSN022-166XE-ISSN1548-80042008bytheBoardofRegentsoftheUniversityofWisconsinSystem
THEJOURNALOFHUMANRESOURCES d XLIII d 4
Borghans, Duckworth, Heckman, and ter Weel 973
I. Introduction
There is ample evidence from economics and psychology that cogni-
1
tive ability is a powerful predictor of economic and social outcomes. It is intuitively
obvious that cognition is essential in processing information, learning, and in decision
2 It is also intuitively obvious that other traits besides raw problem-solving
making.
ability matter for success in life. The effects of personality traits, motivation, health,
strength, and beauty on socioeconomic outcomes have recently been studied by
3
economists.
Thepoweroftraits other than cognitive ability for success in life is vividly demon-
strated by the Perry Preschoolstudy.Thisexperimentalinterventionenrichedtheearly
family environments of disadvantaged children with subnormal intelligence quotients
(IQs). Both treatments and controls were followed into their 40s. As demonstrated in
Figure 1, by age ten, treatment group mean IQs were the same as control group mean
IQs.Yetonavarietyofmeasuresofsocioeconomicachievement,overtheirlifecycles
4
thetreatmentgroupwasfarmoresuccessfulthanthecontrolgroup. Somethingbesides
IQ was changed by the intervention. Heckman et al. (2007) show that it is the
personality and motivation of the participants. This paper examines the relevance of
personality to economics and the relevance of economics to personality psychology.
Economists estimate preference parameters such as time preference, risk aversion,
altruism, and, more recently, social preferences. The predictive power of these pref-
erence parameters, their origins and the stability of these parameters over the life-
cycle, are less well understood and are actively being studied.
Economists are now beginning to use the personality inventories developed by
psychologists. This paper examines these measurement systems and their relation-
ship with the preference parameters of economists. There is danger in economists
taking the labels assigned to psychologists’ personality scores literally and misinter-
preting what they actually measure. We examine the concepts captured by the psy-
chological measurements and the stability of the measurements across situations in
which they are measured.
We eschew the term ‘‘noncognitive’’ to describe personality traits even though
many recent papers in economics use this term in this way. In popular usage, and
in our own prior work, ‘‘noncognitive’’ is often juxtaposed with ‘‘cognitive.’’ This
contrast has intuitive appeal because of contrast between cognitive ability and traits
other than cognitive ability. However, a contrast between ‘‘cognitive’’ and
1. See, for example, Gottfredson (2002), Herrnstein and Murray (1994), and Heckman, Urzua, and Stixrud
(2006).
2. The American Psychological Association Dictionary defines cognition as ‘‘all forms of knowing and
awareness such as perceiving, conceiving, remembering, reasoning, judging, imagining, and problem solv-
ing.’’
3. See Bowles, Gintis, and Osborne (2001), for a review. Among other determinants of earnings, they sum-
marize evidence on the labor market effects of beauty by Hamermesh and Biddle (1994) and Hamermesh,
Meng, and Zhang (2002). Marxist economists (Bowles and Gintis, 1976) pioneered the analysis of the im-
pact of personality on earnings. Mueser (1979) estimates empirical relationships between personality traits
and earnings. Mueller and Plug (2006) relate the Big Five personality factors to earnings. Hartog (1980,
2001) draws on the psychology literature to analyze economic preferences. van Praag (1985) and van Praag
and van Weeren (1988) also link economics with psychology.
4. See Schweinhart et al (2005); Cunha et al. (2006), and Heckman et al. (2007).
974 The Journal of Human Resources
Figure 1
Perry Preschool Program: IQ, by Age and Treatment Group
IQ measured on the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (Terman and Merrill 1960). Test was admin-
istered at program entry and each of the ages indicated. Source: Heckman and Masterov (2007).
‘‘noncognitive’’ traits creates the potential for much confusion because few aspects
of human behavior are devoid of cognition. Many aspects of personality are influ-
enced by cognitive processes. We show that measurements of cognitive ability are
affected by personality factors.
Wefocusouranalysisonpersonalitytraits, defined as patterns of thought, feelings,
and behavior. We do not discuss in depth motivation, values, interests, and attitudes
which give rise to personality traits. Thus, we focus our discussion on individual dif-
ferences in how people actually think, feel, and act, not on how people want to think,
feel, and act. This omission bounds the scope of our work and focuses attention on
traits that have been measured. We refer the interested reader to McAdams (2006),
Roberts et al. (2006), and McAdams and Pals (2007) for an overview of the literature
in psychology on aspects of personality that we neglect.5,6
5. Somepsychologists believe that expectation, motivation, goals, values, and interests fall outside the con-
struct of personality. Others take the position that insofar as these variables are persistent over time, they
can be considered aspects of personality (see Costa and McCrae 1988). Broadly speaking, the field of per-
sonality and individual differences psychology is concerned with all dimensions on which people differ
from one another. For a discussion of vocational interests, their measurement, and their theoretical relation-
ship to personality traits, we direct the reader to Holland (1986), Larson, Rottinghaus, and Borgen (2002),
and Low and Rounds (2006). McAdams (2006) and McAdams and Pals (2007) present a more comprehen-
sive view of personality psychology including basic drives and motivations.
6. Large-scale longitudinal studies linking motivation to economic outcomes are rare. Duncan and Dunifon
(1998) provide the best available evidence that individual differences in motivation measured in young
adulthood predict labor market outcomes more than a decade later. However, they do not correct for the
problem of reverse causality discussed below. As Cunha and Heckman (2007, 2008) show, young adults
can predict over half of their future earnings. The Duncan and Dunifon motivation measure may be a con-
sequence of agent expectations of future benefits rather than a cause of the future benefits.
Borghans, Duckworth, Heckman, and ter Weel 975
Our focus is pragmatic. Personality psychologists have developed measurement
systems for personality traits which economists have begun to use. Most prominent
is the ‘‘Big Five’’ personality inventory. There is value in understanding this system
and related systems before tackling the deeper question of the origins of the traits
that are measured by them.
The lack of familiarity of economists with these personality measures is one rea-
son for their omission from most economic studies. Another reason is that many
economists have yet to be convinced of their predictive validity, stability, or their
causal status, believing instead that behavior is entirely situationally determined.
Most data on personality are observational and not experimental. Personality traits
may, therefore, reflect, rather than cause, the outcomes that they are alleged to pre-
dict. Large-scale studies are necessarily limited in the array of personality measures
that they include. Without evidence that there is value in knowing which personality
traits are most important in predicting outcomes, there is little incentive to include
sufficiently broad and nuanced personality measures in empirical studies.
Most economists are unaware of the evidence that certain personality traits are
more malleable than cognitive ability over the life cycle and are more sensitive to
investment by parents and to other sources of environmental influences at later ages
than are cognitive traits. Social policy designed to remediate deficits in achievement
can be effective by operating outside of purely cognitive channels.
This paper shows that it is possible to conceptualize and measure personality
traits and that both cognitive ability and personality traits predict a variety of so-
cial and economic outcomes. We study the degree to which traits are stable over
situations and over the life cycle. We examine the claim that behavior is purely
situation-specific and show evidence against it. Specifically, in this paper we address
the following questions:
(1) Is it conceptually possible to separate cognitive ability from personality
traits?
Many aspects of personality are a consequence of cognition, and cognition
depends on personality. Nonetheless, one can separate these two aspects of human
differences.
(2) Is it possible to empirically distinguish cognitive from personality traits?
Measures of economic preferences are influenced by numeracy and intelligence.
IQ test scores are determined not only by intelligence, but also by factors such
as motivation and anxiety. Moreover, over the life cycle, the development of cog-
nitive ability is influenced by personality traits such as curiosity, ambition, and
perseverance.
(3) What are the main measurement systems in psychology for intelligence and
personality, and how are they validated?
Most personality psychologists rely on paper-and-pencil self-report question-
naires. Other psychologists and many economists measure conventional economic
preference parameters, such as time preference and risk aversion. We summarize
both types of studies. There is a gap in the literature in psychology: it does not
systematically relate the two types of measurement systems.
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.
